Most ridiculous proposal yet: arm all the teachers.

Man ridiculousness you have the patience of a Saint. I would much prefer a gun being in your hands than that of an unstable blowhard like Not a Teacher. It IS ridiculous to think that we could arm teachers and that they would be effective under a combat environment.

This is, unfortunately, where we probably need to go; identify stable, capable people to be armed first-responders on school grounds.

When we do this we would then need to initiate an immediate ban on assault rifles, greatly augment our ability to understand who is carrying what and why and try to figure out why our society is creating these mindless monsters.

No one has addressed it because the proponents for arming teachers don't have a retort. They know deep down that additional accidents will exceed any deterrents.

27minds11 wrote:

And to solve the problem in Aurora, anyone who goes to the movies should be armed.

Anyone who goes to a mall, like in Clackamas, should also be armed.

And really, why stop at the teachers? Let's put a 9mm in the hand of every first grader.

When it's to the point that you're talking about arming teachers, pause for a moment to reflect just how insane this type of thinking has become.

Hey, dumbfuck. You know the Clackamas shooting was stopped by an armed citizen, right? No? Well, now you know. And he didn't even fire a shot.

my bad. I didn't realize there has been a 'study' (uncited, no link) that shows protecting yourself with a whistle and pointing your finger & yelling POW! POW! was more effective than using an actual gun.

and another anonymous 'study' hours of training on violent video games can turn a psycho punk into an elite shooter? I guess there are a bunch of fat little 8 year old Modern Warfare gamers the Pentagon should call up as snipers.

How do you walk around believing this stuff? Or do you?

I want that opportunity and I want it for those who, like myself, want it. As you have stated, we won't all rise to the occasion, just like your fellow soldiers didn't, which I am sorry for because you are the first combat veteran (I include police in combat) I have ever personally had an exchange with to whom that has happened.

Trained police officers managed to kill or wound 9 people in a firefight. While they messed up, imagine the carnage if everyone yahoo and moron with a little training carried their weapons everywhere and started shooting when they felt the least threatened. Unbelievable.

Okay. Let's let the uninformed in on the discussion.So I assume no one should run as you are more likely to die of a heart attack while running if you run.I assume no on e should have a car since you are more likely to die in an auto accident if you have a car. I assume no one should have a dog, since you are more likely to be attacked by a dog if you own one.Is there any chance you see how stupid your argument is yet. There are no good statistics on how many lives are saved by the presence of guns. According to statistics, zero banks have have been saved from robberies in my town due to the armed guard there. Does that mean that no one would have robbed any banks in my town without the guard? Statistics are useless in the hands of people not intelligent enough to work with them. That is why I didn't want to respond to the type of person who couldn't even get the statistic right when he first posted it. Armed school employees (laymen) have saved lives in the exact situations we are talking about. none were ever disarmed by their students and they in fact have disarmed students. You don't know this because you don't have any background in this arena. You would rather let our children die and let our brave school employees die while fighting back unarmed than to give them a fighting chance if they choose to have one.I think that is sad, especially since I have been personally affected by a school shooting. I wish that the Sandy Hook principal had had access to a firearm. (Not in holster, but in a locked drawer.) She had the time to get it before she ran into the hallway. The way she acted I believe she would have used it well. Next time you rush an armed gunman while unarmed you can judge how she would have handled a gun instead of having to rush in unarmed. Until then you can all go back to not having anything to do with life threatening situations and please leave these decisions to those who at least deal with these situations.

george oscar bluth wrote:

No one has addressed it because the proponents for arming teachers don't have a retort. They know deep down that additional accidents will exceed any deterrents.

The Decision wrote:

This may be the most reasonable idea to come out of this situation yet...

Yeah, because teachers never forget to lock a locker and kids never break into things that they shouldn't.

Serious question: ARE YOU PEOPLE INSANE?!?

What? You've got this "stat" completely backwards.

I'd like you to back up your statement, because you are completely, absolutely, incorrect.

Not a teacher wrote:

I am so happy for your fellow soldiers you are no longer in the military. You are an idiot and apparently unstable and sounds like a coward. Every day laymen (and women) prove brave and collected and effective in emergency situations.

This is a fantasy Americans would love to believe. But it is not true...not even remotely so.

Assumption.

Runners are less likely to die all of the other 99% of the time that they are not running, so this was a terrible example. Also, running is not something designed to kill. Guns are. That is their purpose.

Cars aren't designed to kill. They have other purposes (transportation). Guns have no other purpose besides killing and allegedly "protection". So how are they doing in these areas?

Dogs are not designed to kill. Well, 99% of dogs. They have other purposes. I would also not let a child be around a dog that IS trained to kill.

Grow up.

Agreed - nothing specifically isolated to this. But there are statistics for all gun owners and all non-gun owners to compare. This would factor in the deterrent success of those gun owners, no?

Of course not. I never implied such.

You make typos too. You aren't infallible. You are attacking the person instead of the argument (ad hominem).

Agreed. You keep talking about "guards, guards, guards" lately, but the thread title is about teachers, and I am referring to teachers. If you think it's a good idea for schools to have an armed officer at all times, I could get on board with that. Not teachers.

You know nothing about me, other than that I post on Letsrun.

Wow. Straw man fallacy award goes to Not a teacher. I would rather school kids have less guns around crazies to worry about.

Again, you know nothing about me. And any of your opinions of what "could've" happened are supposition and worth nothing.

Moreover, you've still posted your long rant and refused to answer if you think more students will be saved than killed if teachers were armed. Or are you retracting your thoughts that discussing arming teachers is ludicrous?

If guns are so good at preventing and deterring shootings, then why are gun owners shot more often? MUCH more often?

Lawguy wrote:

Every teacher doesn't need to be armed. My thought would be that every school should have a) a police officer on duty, b) an armed security guard, and or c) teacher(s) or administrators who voluntarily go through rigorous training who have access to secure firearms either in their classroom or the administrative office.

Gun free zones just create shooting galleries for psychos.

The only way to have any chance to stop a school shooting is having someone armed on campus to respond in seconds. The police always arrive after the pyscho has already slaughtered as many people as he can and offed himself.

Yes, that's why in countries where guns are strictly controlled you have lots of school massacres.

[quote]ridiculousness wrote:

Senators, Congressmen, a former Presidential candidate, and gun rights supporters have said the answer is to provide teachers with concealed weapons, training, and to change the law on weapons in schools.

That may be the silliest thing I've ever heard.

I am surprised we have not heard "mainstream" figures calling to arm first graders.

I saw on the news that the state police chief said that with the way the shooter was armored and armed, the police would have had a hard time killing him and he would have killed officers.

Yet an elementary school teacher with a handgun is supposed to be able to make a difference here?

It's all over the news today that Rick Perry, TX Governor and Presidential candidate, is calling for changing the "gun-free school zone" laws and allowing teacher's to carry concealed weapons.

Bombs. Schools need bombs. Claymore mines at every entrance. Every teacher a gun and ammo. Kill or be killed. Killer teachers.

What could go wrong?

I can't imagine any teacher I ever had with a gun. Did you people have gym teachers? Imagine those guys armed. Or the literary chicks? Sure, give Gertrude Stein a Mac 10.

Agreed! The logic is SOOO simple. If each teacher had a gun less kids would have died in CT. Really if 1/2 of the 1st and second graders had guns less kids would have died. (Only give the more responsible 1st graders guns)If each school had two armed guards in front of the door less kids would have been killed. If we had armed lookouts on top of each school building with assault rifles less kids would have died in CT.Its all so simple.

Arm Everyone wrote:

[quote]Hug This wrote:

I am a teacher and I support arming teachers. Lives would have been saved in CT if properly trained teachers took the gunman down.

You have it all wrong...if only the kids had guns, all of this would have been avoided.

Hug This wrote:

ridiculousness wrote:

Senators, Congressmen, a former Presidential candidate, and gun rights supporters have said the answer is to provide teachers with concealed weapons, training, and to change the law on weapons in schools.

That may be the silliest thing I've ever heard. Do they actually believe a 25-50 year old woman in the chaos of a mass shooting could calmly resort to her brief target practice stint at the local gun range to take down a hyped up killer?

Heck, highly trained soldiers freeze up in battle, or just can't deal with the intensity of the situation, and cower.

Good luck with that one.

Do you have a better idea that will prevent the magnitude of these mass shootings? One security guard per school wouldn't have the expected effect, either he'd be the first to be shot or he wouldn't be able to respond in time to chaos happening on the other end of the school.

Hug This wrote:

I am a teacher and I support arming teachers. Lives would have been saved in CT if properly trained teachers took the gunman down.

You are too stupid to be a teacher. No wonder Americans are uneducated.

Better yet. Arm all the kids. Many Americans are stupidly funny.